u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se writes:

> Oh well, if I may dream we could even make repair work like that
>
> ls <conflict>/.codactl/replicas/
> diff <conflict>/.codactl/replicas/{server1,server2}
> diff <conflict>/.codactl/replicas/server1 <conflict>/.codactl/local
> echo server2 > <conflict>/.codactl/prefer
>
> Which could possibly be worth to be available even if <conflict> is not a
> conflict but a healthy file or directory, just in case, like "cfs expand".

That in concept sounds good.

> As of xattrs, their use would exclude OSs which do not support them
> (may there are none nowadays ? keeping the dependencies limited is
> anyway generally useful)

extended attribute support is not universal.

eventually, coda itself should support extended attributes (stored in
the FS).

I don't understand the notion of using xattr for control.  They are
extra properties stored on files, and it seems semantically abusive to
write them as a control operation.   (Having .codactl is also a bit
abusive, but it's s single clean break.)